Opposition Politics: Beyond Pitfalls and Ahead
All of the blame on the current situation cannot be laid on the door of the incumbent. We have witnessed a relentless fall out and division of the opposition camp in recent years. Most of the times, these divisions are either about strategies or personalities.
…Much of what comes in leadership also depends on the followership. In my opinion, most people who sympathize, if not support, the Ethiopian opposition has adversely impacted the way the leadership attempted to operate, often out of positive intentions. One of the usual pitfalls is the urge to see immediate results and hence hurrying opposition parties to do this or that as soon as possible. I call it the temptation of time.
These are dark times to write about the prospect of multi party democracy in Ethiopia compared to the way things were five years ago. The state of the opposition parties in the country is tragic with only one Medrek candidate set to join the national Parliament – the Parliament which looks more like the congress of the EPRDF.
Of course, all of the blame on the current situation cannot be laid on the door of the incumbent. We have witnessed a relentless fall out and division of the opposition camp in recent years. Most of the times, these divisions are either about strategies or personalities.
Following the announcement of 2005 election results, for instance, a debate was raging whether the opposition should or should not be joining the parliament that cut asunder the opposition. While some (UEDF, Ato Lidetu’s faction of EDP, and a number of CUD members like Ato Temsegen Zewdie) decided to join the Parliament, the majority of the CUD leadership ended up in jail.
Upon release from prison, hopes were high that the core of the CUD leadership would have more resolve, espirit de corps and vision to galvanize the opposition. Unfortunately, we witnessed a split of the CUD leadership when the rift between Ato Hailu Shawl and the rest of the CUD leadership became apparent.
Even worse, the departure of Dr Birhanu Nega from CUD and the formation of Ginbot 7 were accompanied with the formation of UDJ under the leadership Birtukan Mideksa. Here again, there were obvious differences on strategy. However, we cannot help but admit that much of the infighting and squabble within the opposition camp has got to do with personal egos and ambitions.
Much of what comes in leadership also depends on the followership. In my opinion, most people who sympathize, if not support, the Ethiopian opposition has adversely impacted the way the leadership attempted to operate, often out of positive intentions. One of the usual pitfalls is the urge to see immediate results and hence hurrying opposition parties to do this or that as soon as possible. I call it the temptation of time.
Another pitfall is the temptation of the ‘demos’- a wide ranging array of sympathizers who are summoned in all kinds of ‘teklala gubaes’- that offer disconcerted, emotional and vague ‘advice’ on what the leaders should or should not be doing. Such meetings end up becoming psychoanalytic exercises where people pour out their anger, frustrations and utter desire for change, go home and sleep.
Another everyday pitfall of opposition politics is the urge to form coalitions and form a united front of resistance against the incumbent. In principle, there is nothing wrong with this. However, most of such coalitions are formed in haste, with little or no thinking over ideological (political or programmatic) matters, or even financial, managerial and organizational issues. Sorting the coalitions out itself becomes politics, instead of using them to wage the struggle against the EPRDF.
Even more, there is a lack of basic discipline in protecting organizational and leadership matters. Both the print and electronic media, particularly of the Ethiopian Diaspora, seems to have an unbridled access on the process of decision making in almost all of the opposition parties. Leaks, accusations, counter-accusations and wide open defamations by renegades are an everyday scene.
While some of this is a logical product of infiltration, most of it has got do with malcontented figures that break rank with their party and go out in public to disclose and incriminate their ex-comrades. Tesfaye Gebre Ab’s ‘literary’ sophistication partly comes with such scoops he was able to disclose to the general public. True, such stories may satiate the minds of the curious public but erode the public’s trust and confidence about the capacity and resolve of opposition parties to launch struggle against the incumbent.
What could be done to reverse this trend and put back the opposition on the right track? I have a few recommendations. First, enough time should be taken to arrive at an ideological outlook which could be able to counter that of the EPRDF. This is very crucial in light of the fact that EPRDF has comfortably placed itself as the middleman between ethno-nationalism and Ethiopian nationalism. In this regard, MEDREK’s attempts to forge an ideological and programmatic alternative should be commended.
Secondly, it is time to buckle down and think about organizational and strategic issues. Here the task should be finding effective strategies of constituency building both within and outside the country in a situation where a dominant party state suffocates the opposition. The cases of Malaysia, Singapore, Japan and Mexico could be worth looking at here.
Thirdly, opposition parties should be able to adopt the ethics of ‘democratic centralism’, though not the principle of democratic centralism. Ways have to be found to prevent endless factionalism, whose consequences end up becoming very irresponsible and image tarnishing. The parties should also stop leaking like a sieve.
Last but not the least, galvanizing and converting the Diaspora (or at least a section of it) into an organized, robust and articulate constituency is a task that lies ahead of the opposition. Apart from supporting the initiatives back home, the Diaspora could serve as an effective public sphere to trash out ideological and strategic issues facing opposition parties. It could also play a key role in liaising, lobbying and influencing key policy makers in Euro-America, who have key economic, diplomatic and moral leverage over the EPRDF.
All said ours is a long walk for freedom but every inch of it is worth treading.
A very constructive essay Derese.
I think more emphasis is needed on how to unite the Diaspora and domestic Ethiopian communities. Since 2005 Diaspora politics have been totally segregated from the domestic one. It has began to live its own life (with internal factionalization and conflicts), and with no clue about the atmosphere and situation back home. This is of course mainly due to the recent legal meassures taken by the incumbent.
Creating practical mechanisms for channeling both human and financial resources to the struggle back home is one big task for the Diaspora. In other words, we need to find a way to re-enter Ethiopian politics.
Maybe if you look closely to the “IRRECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES” claimed to have been existing between the oppositions, you will find the ingredient to their distruction…and maybe the only reason why they should have not emerged as one from the beggining.
If you ask me to guess what that “IRRECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES” is, I would guess it is their association with Shabiya.
Maybe if you look closely to the “IRRECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES” claimed to have been existing between the oppositions, you will find the ingredient to their distruction…and maybe the only reason why they should have not emerged as one from the beggining.
If you ask me to guess what that “IRRECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES” is, I would guess it is their association with Shabiya.
Association with shabiya has nothing to do with it. Woyane was associated with Egypt and all other enemies of Ethiopia in the gurela fighting period. That is a common strategy for any opposition party, be it in Ethiopia or any other country.
I don’t blame opposition parties in Ethiopia at all. Not because they are sin free, but because woyane’s sin weighs way too much.
For the opposition abroad, it is their own problem. We have this irritating, at times madening, behavior that any time different poletical parties come together for negotiation, each party leader seemingly wanted all his ideas to be accepted regardless of the other poletical parties agenda. we don’t have this give and take culture of negotiation, that often results in disintigration. If these people get power, God forbid, they would end up being the same leader we are against at! no question!
The problem is most of the oposition leaders are there for themselves, not for us/the country. They strive for quick ascendary to power. I strongly recommend them to read Mandela’s autobiography and a movie” Invictus”. They are more dangerous than Woyanne
n your recommendation of adopting the ethics of democratic centralism:for me it requires a leap of faith to believe that it is possible to adopt the ethics of democratic centralism with out any allegiance to its principles.AS many would agree democratic centralism is unabashed when it comes to subjecting the rank and the file in to a military like discipline.The problem with the principles is all are predicated in a major grund norm in kelsenian sense of the term which is a strict adherence to a top bottom decision making and a firm resolve in labeling any dissent as heresy.Added to this the practice of this principles in the case of the ruling party has shown us much of the the thing is not enviable.Thus given the fact that the principles stand as an obvious antitheses of democratic values how is it then possible to make a fine line between the ethics and principles of democratic centralism.I for one firmly believe that however fancy this idea may appear to us,translating it in to practice may come as risky and dreadful which requires the diligence,courage and of walking a tight rope.It can surly be deadly and dangerous as an attempt to extract medicine out of venom.How is it possible then to adopt the ethics with out running the risk of stifling dissent and free flow ideas among the opposition camp?I would love to hear from the author.
WEAKNESSES OF OPPOSITION PARTIES KEEP TPLF IN POWER!!!
Derese,
Thank you for raising this timely and important issue and in general I agree with the recommendations forwarded in the re-making of the Ethiopian Opposition.
In Ethiopia, the opposition parties become active only during an election, and disappear when the election is over. Most of the opposition parties in Ethiopia are established around the personalities of individuals and par time politicians. They also lack internal democracy, suffer from inter-party and intra-party conflicts, have severe shortage of human and finance resources, and lack strong base and experience. Their weaknesses also include bad organization and weak connection with the popular constituencies. However, most of the weaknesses of the Ethiopian opposition parties in part emanate from TPLF’s hostile policies and strategies aimed at fragmenting and weakening the opposition groups.
Factors which contribute to factionalism and fragmentation of opposition parties in Ethiopia are varied and mainly include:
• Lack of political cohesion due to polarized competition within the party
• Failure to manage and resolve internal feuds on important issues like ideology, programmes of action and leadership and
• Inability of the party to adapt to changing circumstances or reform the party accordingly
Given appropriate leadership and conflict management strategy, factionalism within a party might also produce positive results because it might promote internal party pluralism and representation of different political and socio-economic interests of members of the party. Similarly, it may be a good indicator of democracy within the party Factionalism might also promote a democratic spirit of ‘give and take’ which would pave the way for consensual decision making in the party. Rather than being an opportunity in developing a new political culture, factional fights within the Ethiopian Opposition parties led to a breakaway party, tarnish the public image of the party, reduce membership drive and support, and result in loss of potential members and leader. These, together with the tendency of opposition parties to criticize and undermine each other rather than capitalize on the heinous crimes of the TPLF, have reduced the electoral strength of the opposition and lessened their chance of liberating the Ethiopian people from the monstrous rule of the TPLF thugs.
Unless the Ethiopian opposition come out of the politics of factionalism and fragmentation and form a formidable and viable coalition, their weaknesses will keep TPLF in power for the foreseeable future.
A timely issue to be thoroughly discussed.
This is a great piece. The struggle for democracy should not be expressed only in terms of replacing TPLF. It should be to empower people to control their own destiny through democratic means. This is a key point missing in the opposition. They just concentrate on defeating TPLF and not give much emphasis to building longer term institution building to sustain demcocracy.
I will never trust the opposition for the same reasons mentioned on the articel. I symphatize with them and try to help what I could from far away. I will not be closer to them. This is a lesson from Kinijit dimise particulary Hailu and Lidetu disgusting behavour during kinijit controversy; particular the agreement they made with Woyanne.
Dear Sam
My call for the adoption of ‘democratic centralism’ was not in teh strict sense o fthe term..I was not saying they shoould behave like socialist parties whose decision making is dominated by a top -down fashion from the leader, then to the polit bureau, then to the CC and then to everybody else….But i am arguing they should have basic discipline of discussing internal policy issues within their remit, solve them, keep them to themselves and move on..Instead our opposition parties take their differences and personal squabbles out to the public only to our disappointment!!!!Party discipline is very very essential…Otherwise I am with you when it comes to ensuring democratic debates within their structures. But such debates cannot go on endlessly and push to the utter dintegration of every party, every coalition, …Thats what I am trying to say…
But I want you, and the rest of the readers to comment on how its possible to do this- allow democratic sicussions and debtates from within but ensuring organizational discipline and unity? How do we trade off these two? I think its an intersting point for discussion, Any comments?
Sam
Dear Derese
Thank you for the clarification on your take regarding democratic centralism.My take was largely informed by the grim realities of democratic centralism as manifested in bitter self criticism better known as gimgema and all this things in the ruling party.The stories I heard about the torture and downsizing nature of the exercise of self criticism has made me a bit pessimistic I admit. Sure as you said the opposition lack party discipline and the result has always been devastating.But the core and perhaps the deep seated problem of the opposition is within your province.How ever raw and crude this idea may appear to us the idea that authoritarian culture,the unbridled lust for power, abhorrence to any competing idea as manifested by a visceral hatred to the ruling party ideas in toto and the verbal savagery we have witnessed during party in fights are all signs of the absence of a culture that nourishes democratic values.Embracing democratic values beyond rhetoric is some thing long overdue.A hind sight look at some of the measures of CUD in the aftermath of the election tells us a lot in this point.How can one explain the ban on association with EPRDF members as any thing else other than a typical anti democratic practice of denying others the right be hold a different opinion.I know there were some factors that triggered this things but the truth remains the same.The detest for any opinion other than CUD’S as exhibited by some members all tell us the deep rooted authoritarianism in the social fabric.I look forward to see a wonderful blog from you on this point.
About leaking, party discipline, etc… Given that Ethiopia is a pseudo- police state, the opposition parties are inevitably going to be victimized by spies, leaks, coercion, etc.
The only way around this is for the opposition to be structured in a way that they do not rely on strict confidentiality or secrecy. Transparent operations is what they need. They should work on the assumption that there are spies in their networks.
Is it possible to function without confidentiality? Sure, in the case of Ethiopia. It’s not like the Democrats and Republicans in the USA fighting a close contest where even the slightest edge in strategy and tactics can be decisive.
In Ethiopia, at this stage, strategy and tactics are not so complicated. Nor are they very important at this stage.
As Lubak said above, what is important is something even more basic. That is the realization that there is one and only one thing that has handicapped the opposition to date, and that is its inability to understand that large coalition building is simply a necessary condition for success. There is no other route to victory.
So while I agree with the items on Derese’s list, I think that on top of the list should be the task of inculcating in party members and supporters an understanding of the necessity of coalition-building and what is needed to build coalitions.
Given so much history around the world of pro-democracy movements against entrenched dictatorships, it is amazing that our opposition leaders keep thinking that they can go it alone! The extent of naivety is shocking, really! Hopefully the leadership in Medrek have learned from their past experience and will work with conviction at coalition-building.
http://www.abugidainfo.com/?p=12254
http://www.abugidainfo.com/?p=12477
Thank you Derese for raising, once again, an interesting and timely topic. I entirely agree with your observation about the ‘demos’ which you say are ‘psychoanalytic exercises where people pour out their anger, frustrations and utter desire for change, go home and sleep’. My worry is that all the discussion that we have on this kind of electronic space seems to follow the same trend. Someone writes a fantastic blog, we read, express our frustrations, condemn, denounce, and criticize EPRDF or the opposition and go home and sleep.
Could we really afford to continue this way? I doubt it. So what is to be done? Obviously there is no simple and straight forward answer but that should not mean there is no answer. The solutions you forwarded to put the opposition back on track could be a very good start and I believe we can think of one or two more. One thing the opposition can do is to try and limit the excessive dependency of opposition politics on the Diaspora and the western nations. Recent trends in countries like Uganda, Rwanda and Ethiopia have clearly shown that the western powers are not convinced of a need for putting more pressure than they currently do either economically or politically. So the time and money that we lose in lobbying western countries is more or less a complete waste. What about the Diaspora? The Ethiopian Diaspora is even more fragmented than the opposition parties in country and in its present form is more of a liability than an asset. The only good thing that could come out of the Diaspora, in my opinion, was their financial contribution but that has become very complicated and difficult with the amendment of the law regulating political parties. Hence opposition parties need to start to be more inward looking. This is challenging and could protract the struggle but eventually has a better chance of success.
Another thing that opposition parties should start to work on is attracting young people to leadership positions. In this sense the opposition seems to be very similar with EPRDF whose leadership is still in the hands of the student activists of the 60s (despite the recent claim of succession. The same is true of the opposition leaders some of whom are well into their seventies and probably suffering from senility. The third thing the opposition should start to work on is finding ways of challenging EPRDF’s divide and rule strategy. This is the elixir that has been eluding the opposition for so long and it seems that the chances of having a strong opposition without resolving this issue are very slim. Having said this I think it’s time for me to go home and sleep.
Sam and Chrysostom and Debela
Very worthy points.. I have to go run to class but will definitely get back to you before I go home and sleep! LOL!!
It is really hopeless to analyze the problem of the oppositions without analyzing how diluted their mixture is…
A gentleman above mentioned their involvement with Shabiya as a norm and inserted past involvment with Egypt as a justification…
None above suggested how the oppositions could focus on the ruling party without cutting the rope that is pulling them backward…
Can anyone run faster without unloading its excessive weight carried on?
Party Dicipline is portion of the solution. Regular House Cleaning perhaps is a very imprtant policy they should adapt. The EPDRF as well as Shabiya usually face the problem of spies and regular house mentainance is what extended their strong hold.
The parties marriage without idieology marriage is a recipe for disasterous orgy.
It clearly shows that Ethiopia and its people has never been the big picuture from the get go…rather bringing down the ruling party as a sole mission for the oppositions.
This also confirms external force (Shabiya) is the driving force in the camp whose aim is only and only bringing down the ruling party.
The supporters were left in the dark not knowing their cause has been hijacked by extrnal forces that uses them for its own proxy but never wanted their existence from the core.
The supporters regularly demanding for transparency and better performance was non existence…it gave the leaders the liberty to do whatever they want with whomever they want…
The leaders were spoiled way too much as they were cheered on and not hold accountable everytime they are outperformed by the ruling party.
The diaspora weiging its financial leverage on the parties were the best strategy adapted as it shows how handicape the leaders are without cash…it also shows how the external force hijacking their cause has been greatly paralized.
This topic is however an excellent topic given it will continue.
Dere,
A very interesting piece!
It is absolutely true that for democracy to succeed, opposition parties should play an equally important role as the government. In fact, in countries where democracy is a “success”, most of the strength comes from the opposition. In our context, opposition parties are in their infancy with a limited prospect of thriving as they should. But this must not be an excuse for not having strong, healthy, efficient and united oppositions.
Credits are due for what the opposition has done in the past few years. One important role played in the mid 90s (Eth. Cal) was raising the political consciousness of the public. With that came faith in oppositions, commitment, scarification and above all optimism for democracy. These hopes were dashed after the election and more so after the leadership in opposition disunite. In my view, that was the worst time in the process of building democracy in Ethiopia. The immediate impact was a huge disappointment and resentful agitations that resulted in loss of many precious lives. The after effect, which is more tragic, is “indifference” for everything- elections, politics, nationality, country, and what not. Nothing could be more fatal to democracy than indifference. I remember reading a quote by Haile Sellasie elsewhere saying: “Throughout history, it has been the inaction of those who could have acted; the indifference of those who should have known better; the silence of the voice of justice when it mattered most; that has made it possible for evil to triumph.”
Here is what I think the problems with opposition politics and what could possibly fix them.
Pitfalls of oppositions:
• Constant bickering among themselves due to competition for power, often resulting in split.
• Failure to separate ideas from individuals.
• Coalitions are myopic by nature- often formed to capitalize opportunities to weaken the ruling party. The only common ground for unity is being against the incumbent regardless of political ideologies. This leads to untimely focus on power in anticipation of success.
• Unhealthy notions of ethnicity and regionalism highly infiltrated in political life –this actually is, to the most part, responsible for lack of social cohesion in many forms of Ethiopian collective life.
What can be done:
• In playing the political card, it is always wise to remember that national interest comes before party interest and/or personal interest.
• Differences in ideas should not be personal. People have to learn to compromise. After all, politics is a compromise-both ideological and moral. In the West, after a heated debate or even a harsh exchange on political matters, people respect one another’s view and remain friends as they have realized that ideas are abstraction of thoughts and never fully define that individual as a person. We, as a society, have to learn how to “agree to disagree” and keep moving as a team instead of being rivals within.
• When coalitions are formed, it should be on the basis of similarity in ideologies. That is and should be the only uniting principle of political parties in multi ethnic, Multi cultural, and multi lingual country like ours.
• Oppositions should be based on rational principles, sound programs, and feasible strategies. Leaders should be disciplined and act responsibly to win the confidence of the public because they are under scrutiny of the public eyes as much as the incumbent is.
Dear Yoni
I know where the EPLF stands as far as Ehtiopia’s peace, unity and proposerity is concerned. I also know that its realtions with Ethiopia are more fundamental and beyond its fall out with its yester ally i.e. teh EPRDF!!Its not regime security which is at stake here but rather state security but I dont think all opposition parties are instruments of the EPLF.
Debela
Wa ati jete gattin gudaa kaba. I completely agree with you brother.
Chrystosom
I am convinced that ‘transparency’ wont take far in the opposition struggle. If that was the case, we could have been successful this.I also have a question for you? How can you form caolitions when issues of organization and strategy are not properly discussed? what is there to unite for?
Derese,
On ‘transparency’… I agree completely with you that party discipline has been missing and that it is very important. They should work on it. They should try as much as possible to prevent indiscipline.
But like I said, no matter how hard they work at it, they will remain vulnerable – that’s the nature of the police state. Their organizations are going to be infiltrated. Their meetings are going to be tapped. Their members are going to be bribed.
Even if they do a good job of party discipline, given the means they have and the political environment, they will be compromised. Therefore their strategy should move away from dependency on confidentiality.
And transparency is one way of doing this. I don’t mean being transparent with everything, of course, but with as much as possible. The main thing is to avoid the risk of confidentiality dependency unless there is absolutely no choice.
A simple example of transparency at work: frequent media appearances. This would preempt any ‘leaks’ or false reports. Or make as many meetings ‘open’ as possible, where even if the minutes were public, there would be no harm. Etc.
Yes, you cannot successfully form coalitions (or any organizations) without eventually tackling organization and strategy. Of course. And this is lacking in the opposition parties, I agree with you.
But what is the raison d’etre of an organization? Not its structure and strategies. It is what I guess we call in today’s lingo, ‘mission and vision’. First, we define an organization’s mission and vision, and then we get to the ‘how’. That’s all I was trying to say.
The opposition’s vision today should be coalition-building and they should get every on side with this vision.
Once everyone agrees with and believes in the vision, then comes the organization, strategy and tactics work. When there is uncertainty or conflict in this area, then they can always come back to the vision to remind themselves of the goal they are working toward.
If the vision is well defined and all the parties subscribe to it, then they will eventually hammer out a viable organization.
However, if this is not the case, if they are lukewarm or ready to jump ship whenever they’re the slightest bit uncomfortable, then… well, we’ve seen what happens.
This is why the single most important thing is for the opposition to define and believe in its vision of building a coalition.
Chrystosom
I completely agree with everything you said!!